Can Brown call an early election?

With all the rumours as to when the election may be, it’s been put about that Tory bloggers have made up this myth of Brown and dithering. Hmmmm 10p tax rate introduced then removed. Election to be called during 2007 Tory Conference and then not called. No examples of dithering.

It was put to me by one journalist that Brown can’t call the election because he is front of the Chilcot inquiry next week. Someone may want to correct me – but surely an inquiry cannot remove the power of the PM to be able to call the election at a time of their choosing? It was then put to me that why would Brown want to annoy Chilcot? Well he seems to have annoyed everyone else would have been my initial response…. BUT, maybe he is thinking an early election avoids new quarterly growth figures which could show a return to recession, avoids tax rises hitting people’s pay packets before an election, and gives him the best chance at victory.

So if its a choice of delaying Chilcot and annoying him, or tax rises and back into recession and annoying the country you can see why talk of an early election is credible.

Brown must be very tempted to go now on a smash and grab election with as short a campaign as possible.

All the soap opera drama of the allegations about his behaviour is helping him seem human and interesting in a reality TV sort of way.

Just as John Prescott’s punch probably helped Labour in 2005, so the bullying is helping Brown with the “non-political” wing of the electorate. He must be being advised to cash in on this before the electorate can be warned that this isn’t a reality TV show and they will be enslaved to debt, and robbed their wealth, in a failing country if they re-elect Labour.

Mr Bean the bully, who would have thought it? I agree, maybe people now think he isn't wet, weak and pathetic anymore. Tough leader needed for tough times and all that! Cannot help thinking that at some point somebody is going to have to come clean on exactly how they intend to tackle the deficit. Osbourne's evasive responses this morning did little to inspire confidence. If we are to vote for change we need to know what that change is!

You wouldnt commit to buying a car before looking under the bonnet and having a loook at the log book. Surely the Shadow Chancellor is alloed to is allowed to say he needs to see what the books are really like before making commitments?

Are you seriously suggesting that a man who may be chancellor in a few weeks time has not yet examined the evidence available, supported by his team of economists? He knows about this, the same as he knew about Lord Ashcroft's tax status. The reality is that he wants to be elected before giving the electorate the chance to baulk at what he intends to do. Some democracy!

I am seriously suggesting that HM Opposition would not have access to the same facts and figures as HM Government. Funny how in 1997 when I was a parliamentary candidate Blair and Brown and the then Shadow Cabinet often talked of not having access to the facts about the economy.

All we need from all parties is some detail about how much they intend to reduce the deficit by, over what time period and with costed details of tax rises and public sector departmental cuts, designed to achieve it. I don't even mnd if the costing aren't that accurate. After all what's a few billion quid here and there these days?

What's the betting that these details will not be in any party manifesto for the forthcoming election? Similarly none of the parties will be listing their nondom sponsors.

P.S If the conservatives fail to achieve a majority will that be the end of Cameron?